Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The true cost of science’s language barrier for non-native English speakers

nature.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 50 posts

Re: The true cost of science’s language barrier for non-native English speakers

#11

Post by tombert »

dpc050505 wrote: post #7
tombert wrote: post #3

I think it's extremely unfair how much of an advantage us native anglophones have in the scientific realm. Doing anything interesting enough to get published is hard enough as it is, and I have to assume that it's substantially harder for people who are also fighting a language barrier as well. A part of me wants something like Esperanto to take over this space.

Esperanto just creates the same language barrier for everyone. English is an easy language to learn. I'm ESL and it's no big deal.

> Esperanto just creates the same language barrier for everyone.

Yes, that's kind of what I was getting at; I think everyone should go through the same hurdles instead of creating a huge advantage for about ~400 million people while the remaining 7.6 billion people have to do extra work.

If we chose a language that isn't really spoken natively, then in theory we could create a system that doesn't give an inherent advantage to any one group.

Obviously that can't be strictly true in practice; a language like Esperanto would give advantages to people more used to European languages, and other conlangs or abandoned languages would have other issues.

> English is an easy language to learn. I'm ESL and it's no big deal.

Is that true? I've always heard that English is a hard language to learn.

Re: The true cost of science’s language barrier for non-native English speakers

#12

Post by nkrisc »

Legend2440 wrote: post #9

I can't see this as the injustice the article makes it out to be. Not standardizing on a single language would just cause more problems. If it wasn't English it would be something else.

The author isn’t arguing against English as a lingua franca, but it seems to me suggesting that there should be more accommodations for those who aren’t native English speakers because they are at a distinct disadvantage.

Re: The true cost of science’s language barrier for non-native English speakers

#13

Post by tomohelix »

There must be a lingua franca and English is likely among the best choices, considering its widespread adoption and relatively low barrier of entry (try Japanese or Vietnamese and you will see what I meant).

But it is true that there is cost to non-English speakers. Maybe we can lower the standard a little bit? I don't mean broken Engrish but if the sentences make sense and the grammar is correct, maybe that is good enough?

Re: The true cost of science’s language barrier for non-native English speakers

#14

Post by unmole »

irrational wrote: post #6

>“Non-native English speakers constitute almost 95% of the world’s population,” Amano says. “If we don’t support those 95%, I’m sure we can’t solve many global challenges.” Is 95% an accurate number? What percentage are not native speakers, but have near native fluency? I've been to Iceland and Denmark and everyone I spoke to in those places could speak English with near native fluency. I remember meeting one guy in…

Iceland and Denmark combined have a population of ~6 million. My hometown has almost twice as many people.

Re: The true cost of science’s language barrier for non-native English speakers

#15

Post by jeepers6 »

tombert wrote: post #3

I think it's extremely unfair how much of an advantage us native anglophones have in the scientific realm. Doing anything interesting enough to get published is hard enough as it is, and I have to assume that it's substantially harder for people who are also fighting a language barrier as well. A part of me wants something like Esperanto to take over this space.

Maybe you should let that part of you say its piece and move on.

Re: The true cost of science’s language barrier for non-native English speakers

#16

Post by ghaff »

tombert wrote: post #11
dpc050505 wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Esperanto just creates the same language barrier for everyone. English is an easy language to learn. I'm ESL and it's no big deal.

> Esperanto just creates the same language barrier for everyone. Yes, that's kind of what I was getting at; I think everyone should go through the same hurdles instead of creating a huge advantage for about ~400 million people while the remaining 7.6 billion people have to do extra work. If we chose a language that isn't really spoken natively, then in theory we could create a system that doesn't give an inherent adv…

No one cares about abstract let’s make everything equally hard fairness And, as you say, Esperanto is still Indo-European and probably Romance so why not just go back to using Latin or French.

Re: The true cost of science’s language barrier for non-native English speakers

#17

Post by pie420 »

Learning English is priority #1 for any human being right now. If you are able to communicate in english, so many opportunities and sources of information open up to you. It shocks me that some countries aren't making it mandatory, but that's due to nationalism and not wanting too much emigration/brain drain I suppose.

Not being moderately fluent in english is inexcusable in the modrn world, in the same that not being tech savvy, or not able to do math is inexcusable. There are basic skills that one needs to operate in a modern world. English is one of them. I appreciate the sentiment, but it's akin to complaining that "In the star wars universe, scientists who don't speak Galactic Basic Standard are at a huge disadvantage." Yes, they are, and it's their fault for not learning the common language. Same with English in 2023.

Re: The true cost of science’s language barrier for non-native English speakers

#18

Post by tombert »

ghaff wrote: post #16
tombert wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Esperanto just creates the same language barrier for everyone. Yes, that's kind of what I was getting at; I think everyone should go through the same hurdles instead of creating a huge advantage for about ~400 million people while the remaining 7.6 billion people have to do extra work. If we chose a language that isn't really spoken natively, then in theory we could create a system that doesn't give an inherent adv…

No one cares about abstract let’s make everything equally hard fairness And, as you say, Esperanto is still Indo-European and probably Romance so why not just go back to using Latin or French.

That's fair! I was just using Esperanto as an example; I'm not opposed to going back to Latin.

Re: The true cost of science’s language barrier for non-native English speakers

#19

Post by akavi »

tomohelix wrote: post #13

There must be a lingua franca and English is likely among the best choices, considering its widespread adoption and relatively low barrier of entry (try Japanese or Vietnamese and you will see what I meant). But it is true that there is cost to non-English speakers. Maybe we can lower the standard a little bit? I don't mean broken Engrish but if the sentences make sense and the grammar is correct, maybe that is good…

Japanese the language qua language is relatively easy from a language agnostic perspective. Formality levels are tricky, but the phonology is fairly simple (very few "weird" sounds) and the grammar is on the regular side.

The writing system on the other hand... IMO the worst used by any major language in the world. Graft a logographic system (already a bad choice to start) from an isolating language onto a highly synthetic verb system, necessitating a whole extra syllabary. Evolve numerous "readings" of each logogram, depending on etymology and history. Then tack on a 2nd syllabary for abstruse historical reasons.

Re: The true cost of science’s language barrier for non-native English speakers

#20

Post by zztop44 »

dpc050505 wrote: post #7
tombert wrote: post #3

I think it's extremely unfair how much of an advantage us native anglophones have in the scientific realm. Doing anything interesting enough to get published is hard enough as it is, and I have to assume that it's substantially harder for people who are also fighting a language barrier as well. A part of me wants something like Esperanto to take over this space.

Esperanto just creates the same language barrier for everyone. English is an easy language to learn. I'm ESL and it's no big deal.

Not all ESLs have it equal, both due to differences in standardised education, and how close your primary language is to English.

For example, a Japanese person probably would find learning English to the level required to publish academic papers to be a “big deal”.

Post reply on HN